Wikileaks founder a rapist and molester...?

[ssj12]

Kasz216 said:

ssj12 said:

Kasz216 said:

How is "accurately reporting the state of wikileaks" an agenda?

Meglomaniac was an actual quote.  Well the full quote was "Paranoid, Powerhungry, Meglomaniac".

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/global/110210/wikileaks-julian-assange-book-inside-openleaks

I've got nothing against wikileaks, though I think everybody who was worth a damn probably left for Openleaks.

Julian Assange on the otherhand, is someone who is trying to combat very real rape charges with fantastical tales of worldwide conspiracies... which are now apparently jewish conspiracies.

Well, even if he is jailed for that, even though I still think this is all BS still (without even any knowledge of wtf assange thinks), he should not be sent to the USA. Even though he was given a journalist of 2010 by Media Web and something by the NYTs, they will argue he isn't a journalist even though countries and journalists around the world says he is.

The justice system is corrupt, plain and simple, this is why I support Cop Watch and all the other liberty programs around the USA to make sure people in power knows they are in the public eye.

This is the kind of Propganda i'm talking about.  The US has a stronger extradition treaty with the UK then it does Sweeden.  If he gets sent to Sweeden, it's HARDER for the US to extradite him.

To extradite from the UK to the US, all the US has to do is show they have probable cause to try him.  In otherwords, basically just point to wikileaks, and a statement where he says he is wikileaks.  Whether or not he's guilty of a crime, up to the US courts.

In Sweeden, they have to convince Sweeden he is guilty before he gets extradited. 

If this was about getting him in the US.  They would of just left him in the UK until they were ready to move.

 

As for the italisized,

 http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/8d8bbaea-3ae3-11e0-8d81-00144feabdc0.html#ixzz1G4idfSCZ
 

In a chapter devoted to it, Domscheit-Berg describes Assange’s treatment of women as reactionary, which is telling in the context of the rape charges now outstanding against Assange in Sweden. Assange was never one for obscenities or lad-chat but he would refuse any woman the right to question him. Domscheit-Berg claims that Assange would “never be able to accept a woman who was truly his equal” and he would “boast about how many children he had fathered”.

Like literally, everything about the guy points to the fact that it wouldn't be out of character for him to have done this... the closest i've seen people say is "Sure he's a male chauvnist but I don't think he'd rape someone!' believing the charges are BS just isn't logical.

If they had complete knowledge of him not using a condom and consented to it all, its not rape. They could easily have said no to him. The women are just stupid whores. They took the aura surrounding his name and thought they would become something somehow, but it backfired.